Two weeks before the wedding is not the time to test that new serum you saw online. Stick to tried-and-true products to avoid surprise breakouts or irritation.
A free-market system based on consumer sovereignty, with the state confined to essential public functions would generate much faster growth, Shenoy wrote in 1963.
Neelesh, the protagonist of Dhadak 2, is not a failed version of SRK; he represents a new cinematic masculinity shaped by historical oppression and injustice.
When he was asked why he was so loud in his criticisms of Indian industry when his purpose could be better served by a shrewder approach, he said, “Because I am a Punjabi, not a Marwari”.
India should build on regulatory architecture instead of driving consumers into the shadows. The real choice is not between prohibition and inaction, but between regulation and chaos.
The idea of a self-contained labour force, be it intellectual or physical, seems redundant. Bihari migrants are an indispensable part of the domestic workforce.
Amit Malviya is correct that Sylheti is not the same as Bengali. But what he and his team seem to lack is any sense of the history beyond that statement.
Tactical and ground conditions, the wait for all loose ends to tie up, festive fervour, and regimental spirit—all had some part to play in 13 April being chosen as the D-day.
Depot facility to be owned, operated & maintained by IAF, with GE Aerospace providing technical inputs, training, support staff & supply of necessary spares & specialised equipment.
We now live in a world order that will keep shifting. India must use this window. This also means we remain disciplined enough not to be knee-jerked into reacting to what Pakistan sees as its moment in the sun.
Ms. Ananya Bharadwaj has learnt her journalism well. From the master, Mr. Shekhar Gupta.
My observations from this cleverly worded and speciously argued article:
1. She clearly mentions that in the Chittisinghpora massacre 35 Sikh men were shot dead. But not even once does she mention that in Pahalgam, every single victim was a Hindu (the only exception being the ponywallah, a Kashmiri local who heroically resisted the terrorists).
There is a very obvious attempt to brush under the carpet the fact that the terrorists first confirmed the religion and, if Hindu, shot dead the victims. The fact that this is a clear cut case of massacre on religious lines, a hate crime, is not mentioned even once in the article.
2. The article does not even mention the role of the elected representatives of the Kashmir valley. A section of these people have been openly threatening the tourists. There are videos on the public domain which clearly show them portraying tourists as “a threat to Kashmiri culture”. Are they not responsible too?
It’s totally ok to be anti-BJP or anti-Modi.
But journalism demands the whole truth, not parts of the truth. This article only lists out parts of the truth – that too only the convenient parts.
Another question to be asked is why security personnel didn’t use choppers to reach the spot?
Ms. Ananya Bharadwaj has learnt her journalism well. From the master, Mr. Shekhar Gupta.
My observations from this cleverly worded and speciously argued article:
1. She clearly mentions that in the Chittisinghpora massacre 35 Sikh men were shot dead. But not even once does she mention that in Pahalgam, every single victim was a Hindu (the only exception being the ponywallah, a Kashmiri local who heroically resisted the terrorists).
There is a very obvious attempt to brush under the carpet the fact that the terrorists first confirmed the religion and, if Hindu, shot dead the victims. The fact that this is a clear cut case of massacre on religious lines, a hate crime, is not mentioned even once in the article.
2. The article does not even mention the role of the elected representatives of the Kashmir valley. A section of these people have been openly threatening the tourists. There are videos on the public domain which clearly show them portraying tourists as “a threat to Kashmiri culture”. Are they not responsible too?
It’s totally ok to be anti-BJP or anti-Modi.
But journalism demands the whole truth, not parts of the truth. This article only lists out parts of the truth – that too only the convenient parts.